Reply #31: Having a Castle Doctrine, and not having a Duty to Retreat are quite different effects.

[AtheistCrusader]

Scenario: '3am Bump in the Night'

I walk out to my living room, someone has kicked down my door, and is taking my stuff. I say 'hey man, that's my stuff'. Intruder says 'mine now'. Doesn't necessarily threaten me in any way. Just taking my stuff.

In my state, where we have no duty to retreat, I cannot legally shoot the intruder, and if I do, I might have some difficulty or would at least perjure myself trying to prove I felt some imminent threat.

In Florida, you could probably fire away, and there would be no detailed investigation. You would not have to prove any duress/fear/danger.

I prefer our method, to Florida's. (assuming I fully understand the ramifications of Florida's law. I can think of a couple anecdotal instances where this interpretation was borne out by actual events)


The reason I prefer to 'hole up' and protect myself, is I may not be aware if my intruder is alone, or accompanied. Perhaps there is another in my backyard. Perhaps he or she is a better runner. Perhaps he or she is armed with a weapon. I don't want to turn my back on someone with a weapon. My familiar surroundings give me somewhat of an advantage if it comes down to shooting it out with an armed intruder, even a competent, armed intruder. I can choose better cover/concealment. I have a better understanding of the intruder's available cover and concealment. And, time is on my side, if I have notified the police.

I cannot know, prior to fleeing, where exactly my intruder might be, how many there are, the intruders intentions, and capabilities.